A proposed salary plan for employees of the city of Russellville has returned and was discussed more than an hour by department heads and city council members Tuesday.

However, the primary roadblock standing in the way of implementing a salary plan is the same one that brought talks and hours of work by the Personnel Committee to a halt last year: How will it be funded?

Another question brought up during Tuesday's Personnel Committee meeting at City Hall was: What happened to those $1,000 stipends promised to city employees during the budget process last year?

Recreation and Parks Director Mack Hollis explained his employees weren't very happy, as other council members said they had been hearing various comments, questions and dissension.

"There's a lot of dissension within our department," Hollis said. "They never believed the stipend would happen, even after they read it in the newspaper. They ask me every day, 'Is this going to happen?' They say other departments got raises, but we didn't."

"I'm getting beat up," Alderman Ronnie Tripp said. "Everywhere I go, people ask me, 'Why did you give people a raise here and not there?'"

The salary plan, brought to the meeting by Alderman Randal Crouch, is very similar to the plan created by committee members last year and highlighted during the council's October meeting.

The salary plan is intended to provide the city with a formal system for classifying positions in a structured manner, and compensating employees fairly and equitably. The purpose of the salary plan is to provide a classification system with minimums and maximums, according to Mayor Raye Turner, with the maximum amount to be set as an incentive. It will give employees access to see if and when they want to advance positions or grades.

The plan will also establish rules and guidelines of pay for employees, so employees hired at base level will know what to expect and how to move up and what the expectations are for working for the city of Russellville.

Separate from the plan is a longevity table for non-uniform employees that gives an annual $500 bonus to employees with at least five and up to 10 years of service; $750 bonus for employees with at least 10 and up to 15 years; $1,000 bonus for employees with at least 15 and up to 20 years; $1,250 bonus for employees with at least 15 and up to 20 years; and $1,500 bonus for employees with at least 25 years of service.

City Treasurer Jennifer Humphrey said during the meeting if a salary plan was implemented, 18 non-uniform employees would not receive anything because their salaries were already at the minimum and they did not qualify for $500 longevity bonuses unless they were employed by the city for five years.

"Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have a salary plan, but I would hate for us to be in a position not to be able to afford the salary plan next year," Hollis said. "One employee said the only problem with the stipend is after we get it, next year we'll be back in the same boat as we were this year. Most of our employees, the majority of them, I believe, were for the stipend."

"We maybe should have set aside so much money a month so we could pay the stipend sooner," Tripp said.

"And we promised them that," added Alderman Faye Abernathy. "I don't see how we can change now and not give it to them."

If implemented as soon as possible and approved by the council, committee members agreed a salary plan could cost the city at least $117,000. Tripp cautioned that he wanted to know the overall total cost of the salary plan since there was no sense in approving a salary plan if the city couldn't fund it.

The council voted unanimously last November on an ordinance for a salary plan that would establish a fund for revenue derived from city property tax, dedicated that revenue exclusively for salary adjustments and for other purposes. Options to fund the salary plan and its adjustments were a city sales tax or a two-mill property tax. The two-mill property tax failed during a special election last November.

The council tied 4-4 on an ordinance last September, proposed by Alderman Robert Wiley, that would have asked voters to decide on a one-eighth cent sales tax to fund salary increases and adjustments. The ordinance failed, needing six votes for approval from the eight-member council.

Aldermen tied again 4-4 on an ordinance that would raise the city's property tax to two mills to fund salary increases and adjustments, with Turner casting the tie-breaking vote for passage. Soon after, a petition signature campaign started and successfully put the issue of a property tax increase to voters.

"We've got to know how much the total amount is, and know how much we've got coming in," Tripp said. "If we implement this salary plan, we've got to know to the penny how much this will cost us and know how much we've got coming in. We're going to have to do something, because right now our expenditures are exceeding our revenue."

Tripp asked if Humphrey could figure out what the 2006 personnel budget would look like with an implemented salary plan.

"We've got to know how many dollars," he added. "I don't see us approving a plan and not knowing how much it's going to cost. My concern still is the money to fund it. If your budget is increasing 2 percent, and you're giving employees a 3-percent raise, you're going in the hole."

Humphrey told the committee the personnel portion of the city's 2005 budget comprises 70 percent. She added to get everyone on a salary, including benefits and other costs, it would cost the city approximately $120,000. The salary plan would bring 35 employees to their minimum salary requirements this year.

"We're in a lot of trouble," Carruth said.

Then, discussion came back around to the $1,000 stipends approved by the council last year.

"Why don't we look at giving half the stipend as soon as possible, so we can give them some money?" Tripp asked. "Then we can look at giving the other half later in the year."

Humphrey noted that a CD not earmarked for anything could fund the stipends, if aldermen decided to go that route. They also discussed paying half now, half later, as well as quarterly installments. Humphrey said the stipend could be paid in quarterly installments without the city having to draw from its emergency fund. Since new appropriations were approved by the council at the beginning of the year, the city has no surplus funds. the city's $8.82 million 2005 general budget included $1,000 bonus payments "when the bonuses are issued sometime in the summer."

Crouch suggested personnel committee members meet every two weeks until a salary plan is agreed upon, since a plan couldn't be implemented this year.

"The main difference in this salary plan is we're putting some actual dollars into it to see how it will affect us budget-wise," Crouch said after the meeting. "We have a tendency to wait until the last minute, and if we start now, we can work on it and implement before next year's budget work begins in August."

"We looked at the budget numbers last year, and decided we couldn't fund it. That's why the salary plan died last year," Tripp said. "If we're not going to get over 2-percent increase in revenue this year, I don't think we can afford this. If personnel is 70 or 71 percent of our budget, we can't fund 3 percent raises. We can't pass or deny anything unless we see the dollar amount."

The committee scheduled another meeting for 4 p.m. April 26 at Russellville City Hall.